Any value in submitting to article directories?

[Alon]

What is your view on articles sites such as <snip>?
Is it any value in submitting news articles with back links to your site?
.

[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 4:38 am (utc) on Aug 9, 2013]
[edit reason] removed name of article directory, per forum Charter [/edit]

[Robert Charlton]

Alon - I think Google has made it extremely clear in recent weeks that it doesn't like dofollow links from multiple or similar copies of articles, guest blogs, press releases, etc. Google regards these as links you are placing yourself, for purposes of linking to yourself, and therefore considers them spam.

IMO, article directories were dead years ago. The Matt Cutts quote in the following recent thread indicates his current thinking... that article directories very obviously aren't credible sources of links....

Google says link building is not dead, illegal or bad
http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4592085.htm [webmasterworld.com]

Note Matt's comments in the last sentence....

The problem is that if we look at the overall volume of guest posting we see a large number of people who are offering guest blogs or guest blog articles where they are writing the same article and producing multiple copies of it....

If people just move away from doing article banks or article directories or article marketing to guest blogging and they don’t raise their quality thresholds for the content, then that can cause problems....

Also see this recent thread on press releases, slightly more recent, which discusses how Google looks at self-links in all these sources....

Press Releases - Are they spam?
http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4593187.htm [webmasterworld.com]

[JS_Harris]

You need look no further than the metrics for the article directories themselves. Given that many of them are now seriously Pandalized it's probably not a good idea. Web 2.0 sites, social profiles, tiered link networks... all are being locked onto right now by Google according to Matt. They are working on ways to "go upstream" and deny multiple levels of sites at the same time.

Personally I'm glad too, I've avoided allowing any kind of user generated content on my site for the past few months because of just how much automated spam is out there.

[edited by: JS_Harris at 5:34 am (utc) on Aug 9, 2013]

[Alon]

Thanks guys,

So do you suggest that I should remove old articles from sites such as [snip].

Also, Anchor text - what % would you consider is too many

Much appreciate your input guys

[edited by: phranque at 2:03 am (utc) on Aug 11, 2013]
[edit reason] removed name of article directory, per forum Charter [/edit]

[JS_Harris]

If you can remove them I would get that done now, or at least remove the link to your site from them.

The only good answer to your anchor text question is that there is no specific number. When you target a specific number your writing becomes unusual and when you find the same thing on all your pages it looks very unnatural to an algorithm. Write naturally and it's not going to be a problem.

[Alon]

Thanks JS,

sites such as [snip] have a high page ranking.


You also have blogs that are happy to publish your blog on their site for a fee. They allow you to embed to links in the article.

Please what is your view

[edited by: phranque at 2:03 am (utc) on Aug 11, 2013]
[edit reason] removed name of article directory, per forum Charter [/edit]

[Robert Charlton]

Alon - Matt Cutts has suggested that you not do guest blogging, and that guest blogging was probably a step up from article directories. I would do my best either to get your stuff taken down asap, or to get your links nofollowed. Otherwise, it is very likely that you're going to be penalized.

Google is fine with traffic that results in natural links. It is not fine with dofollow links to your site on any of the sources you are looking at.

[Alon]

Thanks Robert,

what about normal blogs that others are publishing your articles

like sponsor reviews

Thanks

[Robert Charlton]

Alon - You're going to have to do some interpreting for yourself. We can't do all of your thinking for you.

[ColourOfSpring]

Wouldn't even bother with no-follow links on junk article sites - who knows if the publishing site will change those to do-follow through some nefarious update.

[Alon]

I have taken all comments fro great webmasters and deleted all articles.

I think keeping content on your website has a better long term benefit.
<snip>

[edited by: goodroi at 10:11 am (utc) on Aug 9, 2013]
[edit reason] Please no specifics [/edit]

[Pjman]

The only value of article directories is to be used as a tool against your competitors in negative seo campaigns.

I have been noticing my competitors doing this against me and others.

I basically try to figure out who doesn't have random article links in our niche and that tells me who is doing it.

[deeper]

What about writing good unique articles, without spreading copies?

[Planet13]

"What about writing good unique articles, without spreading copies?"

I think you would enjoy greater success if you put those articles on your own domain and tried to get people to link to them.

[turbocharged]

Nope, article directories are spammed to death, devalued by Google and have few "real" visitors. Focus your efforts on social to build a presence and steady flow of traffic instead.

[deeper]

I ask because SEOMOZ teaches in a video that never the kind of site itsself is bad, it's the way you use it. That's essential for Google. With kind of site I mean social bookmark sites, directories, blogs, press release. These all are good, they are not bad for itsself.

So i wonder what kind of usage could made them good in the eyes of Google. Does it have to be nofollow or may there be ways with counting dofollow links...

[turbocharged]

Deeper, how you use a site would most certainly have some sort of influence if the links pointing to your site were manually reviewed by a Google employee. Because of a lack of moderation, most article directories have become nothing more than a cesspool and carry no value whatsoever (no real traffic, no SEO benefits, etc.). This same lack of moderation has killed many social bookmarking sites, blogs, etc.

Instead of trying to make a very small clean spot in a dirty toilet (unmoderated and heavily spammed site), would it not be easier to simply flush the idea and spend your efforts on something productive that does have benefits?

[deeper]

@turbocharges:

It's more a question of how to deal with already existing entries in directories (disavow?). I don't intend to invest my time in any further directories.

And often it is not black or white, not all directories are dirty toilets or valuable perls.

I checked the directory-links of a certain site. No article directories, but just simple web directories where you leave a small description (about 300 characters), the link text (anchor) and of course the URL, after having found a proper category. All directories offer a lot of different categories (amusement, money, hobbies, shops.....). I analyzed the directories and the linking page there.

Usually it is like this:

-The average directory is about 5 years old, has about 1000-5000 entries and a PR 2 for the homepage, whereas the linking category in "unranked".

-The quality of the sites there is "o.k."; there is a certain quality check by the directory owner, sorting out really bad sites, #*$!, spam ect.

-The average directory is hit by panda or penguin; there is no notable traffic any more.

-Some of the directories have a detail page for every entry and categories which match exactly my topic.

-Sometimes my entry is the first one in the category or at least on the first page of the category.

My descriptions and anchors are unique.

How does Google treat such links? Better disavowing?

[Planet13]

@ deeper:

I think the better question is this:

If you DON'T disavow those directories and you are hit by Penguin, what will you do? It may take months to recover from Penguin. Other people on this site believe there is NO recovery from Penguin.

If you DON'T disavow those directories then you should have a good back up plan.

[turbocharged]

As I noted previously deeper, article directories are already devalued. The links they provide, for the most part, are not editorial links that have been earned. Article directories are some of the lowest fruit that can be picked from the link tree. If this is the worst your link profile has, and you are hit by Penguin, it's a no-brainer in what you should do. If you have other types of links that are worse, start with them.

Disclaimer: I'm not a fan of helping Google do its job and don't personally use the disavow tool.